Greyhound Racing - The power within the history of the sport
Greyhound Racing in the UK has been going for almost 100 years. Floyd Amphlett takes a look over the men who have had power over the sport through the years
Have you ever wondered who runs the greyhound industry? – writes Floyd Amphlett.
The track promoters? The bookies? The GBGB? The media rights companies? The Government?
It is actually a more complicated picture than you might first think.
Like a box set of Succession, the power has flowed and waned over years.
Much more often than not, decisions have been made on the basis of personal or corporate gain, rather than for the greater good of the industry.
If you want to know ‘why we are, where we are’ . . .
The early leaders of greyhound racing
Back in 1927, the original track owners, the Greyhound Racing Association (GRA), were a private company that would soon be floated on the stock market.
They soon realised that they needed an independent body to oversee them and nine months after the first meeting, they helped form and fund the National Greyhound Racing Club (NGRC) which had already swelled to 43 member tracks.
To be credible, the new gambling phenomenon needed to be overseen by ‘proper chaps’. Gentry with land and titles, or significant chunks of brass on their military epaulettes – preferably both.
Their greatest asset was their perceived flawless personal integrity. People who would do the right thing, irrespective of outside interference or influence.
There were a dozen stewards in total and they were soon controlling more than 300 staff of various types.
In the 1932 year book, the NGRC state it “controls the conduct of greyhound racing in England, Scotland, Wales and, all but a few unimportant tracks.
“It arose out of the general public demand for some national body which should be independent of any financial interest in greyhound racing, and which should take in hand the task of drawing up and enforcing a code of rules."
It references the non-NGRC venues as “parasite tracks”.
The Senior Steward was Mr H Sawtell, assisted by two captains, one professor, the Lord Lawrence and Brig-Gen Hon.A.V.F. H Russell c.m.g. c.v.o.
Not that you would you mess with their stipendiary stewards either, headed by two decorated former army colonels.
To be fair, with such enormous of money being bet on greyhound racing – the equivalent today of billions – and with horseracing and the church looking for a ban – it was vital to be seen to be squeaky clean.
The tracks in the meantime set up the National Greyhound Racing Society – a rough equivalent of the Promoters Association.
There were various clashes over the years but generally most disputes between the two organisations were kept in-house.
Power struggles in greyhound racing
All that was to change with the arrival of Fred Underhill at the NGRS in 1962.
The former local government employee from Dudley would then head a new organisation, the National Greyhound Racing Club Ltd in 1972, which was effectively a combination of the two founding organisations.
That repetition – combining and then separating the rules and regulation sector from the commercial branch has been a repeating feature over the years.
In 1977 Underhill was actively involved in setting up the British Greyhound Racing Federation – a body set up to represent the various sectors of the industry including trainers and breeders.
Among its ambitions, was a failed attempt to control the registry of all racing dogs, thus removing the role from the Greyhound Stud Book and Irish Coursing Club.
(On a personal note, my father, Ced, was a board member, something that sparked my initial interest in industry politics)
The Federation only lasted two years before being replaced by the British Consultative Body and a new organisation called the British Greyhound Racing Board (BGRB).
The reasons for the attempt to produce a ‘representative body’ was political. Greyhound racing was still actively pursuing parity with horseracing in seeking a levy from the Government.
It didn’t take much reading between the lines to work out that – whether a suitable excuse or not – the Government didn’t trust the industry.
They suspected that any funds coming into greyhound racing would be siphoned off by the track owners and their shareholders with little getting through to the owners, trainers, breeders and other sectors.
That cynicism would later be borne out in the early days of the BGRF.
Ironically though, there would never be a better chance to bring the industry to heel than during the Underhill era.
Direct and confrontational, he set about bending the greyhound industry to his will in the style of a benevolent dictator.
Underhill ruled with a rod of iron, was regularly in conflict with the track owners, and on numerous occasions threatened to suspend the track’s NGRC licenses.
His logic became apparent in a post retirement interview with The Sporting Life’s Alan Lennox in 1993 in which he expressed his greatest regrets:
The first was the failure of the industry to gain copyright over its results when betting shops first opened in 1961.
Underhill stated: “We were advised that while copyright probably existed over the publication of race fixtures, this did not necessarily apply to race results. A similar situation arose when Ladbrokes sought to purchase the tracks owned by Greyhound and Totalisator Holdings in 1974.
“The NGRC could withhold an operating licence from an individual, but not from any given body of individuals such as bookmakers. The legal and associated costs of opposing these and subsequent applications would have been enormous.”
Underhill died in 2005 and – with the benefit of hindsight – might be viewed as the last man with the desire and clout to do the right thing for the greyhound industry as a whole.
Underhill’s successor in 1988 was the former Sporting Life Greyhound Editor Archie Newhouse.
History might suggest that Newhouse, once a fierce critic of the NGRC, became more ‘malleable’ upon taking over.
It was a cosy retirement position and it would be fair to say that the tracks never had it so good.
Track owners take control of greyhound racing
By the time that Newhouse retired in 1995, the track owners were dictating terms.
To do so, they decided that the governing body should again be split.
.jpg)
The rules making body should revert to being called the NGRC, led by former trainer Frank Melville, while the BGRB, returned to being the industry’s ‘commercial’ body.
It was run by Geoffrey Thomas, a decent, affable guy, but no ‘Fred’.
In his entire era at the Board, Thomas was never known to openly challenge the promoters.
It was a time of great friction between former friends Thomas and Melville and one one stage the NGRC also bankrupted the Board when refusing a signature to sign off its accounts. It was a move that ultimately led to resignation of its Senior Steward.
In the meantime, the track owners had cemented their position on GBGB. Those racecourse promoters included some particularly strong (coercive) characters.
Geoffrey would have been in no doubt, ‘do as you are told or you will be replaced by someone who will.’
Regrettably, and barring a handful of occasions, no Board CEO or MD has ever been brave, or naive enough, to seriously challenge the promoters.
A few Board chairman have had a go. They have either been toppled or chosen to walk.
But the track owners would have bigger opponents to fight.
Next time – the tracks v the bookmakers . . . and the Fund.
